Happiness in LF

[Raphael Bustin]

Maybe to change the tone a bit, here's the story
of my first foray into LF over the last few days
and weeks. I've been shooting 35 mm and MF
since I was a brat, and working mostly in the
"digital darkroom" since 1998 or so. One can
never have enough pixels, you know...

The gear includes a new Shen-Hao 4x5 and
Nikon SW-90 f/8 from Badger. The rest of it --
film holders, spot meter, tripod, etc -- were
either from my existing kit or borrowed. For
my first outing I shot Portra 160 VC.

For scanning, I found super hot deal on a
Microtek/Artixscan 2500. It's a *huge* mother
of a scanner but does a beautiful job and
delivers an honest 2500 dpi from sheet film,
in a single pass, in about three minutes.

Results are awesome, if I do say so myself.
I mean, nothing so far that's going to win any
contests or sell for big bucks, but the tonality
and detail blew me away and even impressed
my wife, which is saying a lot. The image
below is the first photo out of this camera:

http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchen2.jpg

Here's a small detail from at full scan resolution:

http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchendetail.jpg

One hundred million pixels all told. Life is good.

So there it is. Start of a new adventure. It's been
cold & windy in Boston of late, and not all that
pretty, but I'm already thinking of the photo ops that
await... either with spring or (more likely) a good
dose of fresh snow.

Rather a different trip from shooting with the
10D, I'll say that much <G>.

Regrets? Well, hell, it's a lot of work and WAY
slow and I really miss having ICE to clean up
my scans. For now, I'm stuck with sending my
film off for processing, which kinda sucks.

A tip of the hat to Steve's great book and to Jack
Dykinga's book and my good friend Carl for getting
me this far.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com

[MikeWhy]

"Raphael Bustin" > wrote in message
...
> below is the first photo out of this camera:
>
> http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchen2.jpg
>
> Here's a small detail from at full scan resolution:
>
> http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchendetail.jpg
>
> One hundred million pixels all told. Life is good.

That does take one's breath away. Window screening from across the room,
too. Have you done the math on that?

[narnold]

Exciting, and nice work too. I like your Hawaii photos. I consider
Hawaii to be a lot more challenging to photograph than places like the
desert southwest., You obviously have a good grounding, and are going
to fall deeply in love with LF.

>
>Maybe to change the tone a bit, here's the story
>of my first foray into LF over the last few days
>and weeks. I've been shooting 35 mm and MF
>since I was a brat, and working mostly in the
>"digital darkroom" since 1998 or so. One can
>never have enough pixels, you know...
>
>The gear includes a new Shen-Hao 4x5 and
>Nikon SW-90 f/8 from Badger. The rest of it --
>film holders, spot meter, tripod, etc -- were
>either from my existing kit or borrowed. For
>my first outing I shot Portra 160 VC.
>
>For scanning, I found super hot deal on a
>Microtek/Artixscan 2500. It's a *huge* mother
>of a scanner but does a beautiful job and
>delivers an honest 2500 dpi from sheet film,
>in a single pass, in about three minutes.
>
>Results are awesome, if I do say so myself.
>I mean, nothing so far that's going to win any
>contests or sell for big bucks, but the tonality
>and detail blew me away and even impressed
>my wife, which is saying a lot. The image
>below is the first photo out of this camera:
>
>http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchen2.jpg
>
>Here's a small detail from at full scan resolution:
>
>http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchendetail.jpg
>
>One hundred million pixels all told. Life is good.
>
>So there it is. Start of a new adventure. It's been
>cold & windy in Boston of late, and not all that
>pretty, but I'm already thinking of the photo ops that
>await... either with spring or (more likely) a good
>dose of fresh snow.
>
>Rather a different trip from shooting with the
>10D, I'll say that much <G>.
>
>Regrets? Well, hell, it's a lot of work and WAY
>slow and I really miss having ICE to clean up
>my scans. For now, I'm stuck with sending my
>film off for processing, which kinda sucks.
>
>A tip of the hat to Steve's great book and to Jack
>Dykinga's book and my good friend Carl for getting
>me this far.
>
>
>rafe b.
>http://www.terrapinphoto.com

[Raphael Bustin]

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:54:46 GMT, "MikeWhy" >
wrote:

>"Raphael Bustin" > wrote in message
...
>> below is the first photo out of this camera:
>>
>> http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchen2.jpg
>>
>> Here's a small detail from at full scan resolution:
>>
>> http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchendetail.jpg
>>
>> One hundred million pixels all told. Life is good.
>
>That does take one's breath away. Window screening from across the room,
>too. Have you done the math on that?


Not exactly. What I've seen are some MTF figures
for the SW 90 that were quite impressive. For a long
time I've considered the "real" information content of
film to be in the 2500 dpi to 4000 dpi range. See:

<http://www.terrapinphoto.com/jmdavis>

I've worked with CCD film scanners at 1950 dpi,
2700 dpi and 4000 dpi. There's clearly a diminishing
return as one goes higher. If I had infinite bucks and
computing power I'd get a drum scanner or an Imacon.
I sure wish Nikon (or anybody) made an up to date
4x5 film scanner that I could afford.

In any case, 4x5 has 20 square inches vs. about 1.5
square inches for 35 mm, and about 4 square inches
from 645. I imagine good scans from 4x5 should make
awesome 32 x 40" prints.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com

[Raphael Bustin]

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 00:12:59 -0700, narnold
> wrote:

>Exciting, and nice work too. I like your Hawaii photos. I consider
>Hawaii to be a lot more challenging to photograph than places like the
>desert southwest., You obviously have a good grounding, and are going
>to fall deeply in love with LF.


Hawaii challenging? It's one of the most
photogenic places on the planet, IMO.

I'd love to spend more time in the
Southwest. I know very little about that
part of the country. Just gotta watch out
for the scorpions, I hear.

Thanks for the kind words.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com

[narnold]

Scorpions in the southwest, Centipedes in Hawaii. Don't get me wrong,
I love hawaii, especially places like Haleakala, Waipio Valley, Hana,
etc. I think the problem I have there is that I get a bit overwhelmed
with the lushness, and I find the light to be different from what I'm
accustomed to.

>On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 00:12:59 -0700, narnold
> wrote:
>
>>Exciting, and nice work too. I like your Hawaii photos. I consider
>>Hawaii to be a lot more challenging to photograph than places like the
>>desert southwest., You obviously have a good grounding, and are going
>>to fall deeply in love with LF.
>
>
>Hawaii challenging? It's one of the most
>photogenic places on the planet, IMO.
>
>I'd love to spend more time in the
>Southwest. I know very little about that
>part of the country. Just gotta watch out
>for the scorpions, I hear.
>
>Thanks for the kind words.
>
>
>rafe b.
>http://www.terrapinphoto.com

[Gregory W Blank]

In article >,
Raphael Bustin > wrote:

> On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 00:12:59 -0700, narnold
> > wrote:
>
> >Exciting, and nice work too. I like your Hawaii photos. I consider
> >Hawaii to be a lot more challenging to photograph than places like the
> >desert southwest., You obviously have a good grounding, and are going
> >to fall deeply in love with LF.
>
>
> Hawaii challenging? It's one of the most
> photogenic places on the planet, IMO.
>
> I'd love to spend more time in the
> Southwest. I know very little about that
> part of the country. Just gotta watch out
> for the scorpions, I hear.
>
> Thanks for the kind words.
>
>
> rafe b.
> http://www.terrapinphoto.com

For me it was rattlesnakes, almost stepped onto one
just outside of Albequerque while scambling over rocks
for some pics. Ouch and watch out for those crotch high
catuses,...I got a leg full of very painfull 1.5" needles running back to
the range rover for my meter.
--
LF website http://members.bellatlantic.net/~gblank

[jjs]

"narnold" > wrote in message
...
> Scorpions in the southwest,
[...]

Scorpions are really no problem. Nor are the rattlesnakes, and Tarantulas
are just big friendly critters.

But back to the quality of the image Rafe posted - Say Rafe! I see a tiny
dustball in the corner. It's about the size of a gnat.

[Leonard Evens]

Raphael Bustin wrote:
> Maybe to change the tone a bit, here's the story
> of my first foray into LF over the last few days
> and weeks. I've been shooting 35 mm and MF
> since I was a brat, and working mostly in the
> "digital darkroom" since 1998 or so. One can
> never have enough pixels, you know...
>
> The gear includes a new Shen-Hao 4x5 and
> Nikon SW-90 f/8 from Badger. The rest of it --
> film holders, spot meter, tripod, etc -- were
> either from my existing kit or borrowed. For
> my first outing I shot Portra 160 VC.
>
> For scanning, I found super hot deal on a
> Microtek/Artixscan 2500. It's a *huge* mother
> of a scanner but does a beautiful job and
> delivers an honest 2500 dpi from sheet film,
> in a single pass, in about three minutes.
>
> Results are awesome, if I do say so myself.
> I mean, nothing so far that's going to win any
> contests or sell for big bucks, but the tonality
> and detail blew me away and even impressed
> my wife, which is saying a lot. The image
> below is the first photo out of this camera:
>
> http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchen2.jpg

Great picture for a first attempt in relatively difficult lighting.

You might experiment with taking the same picture but with verticals
kept parallel, to familiarize yourself with movements.

>
> Here's a small detail from at full scan resolution:
>
> http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchendetail.jpg
>
> One hundred million pixels all told. Life is good.
>
> So there it is. Start of a new adventure. It's been
> cold & windy in Boston of late, and not all that
> pretty, but I'm already thinking of the photo ops that
> await... either with spring or (more likely) a good
> dose of fresh snow.
>
> Rather a different trip from shooting with the
> 10D, I'll say that much <G>.
>
> Regrets? Well, hell, it's a lot of work and WAY
> slow and I really miss having ICE to clean up
> my scans. For now, I'm stuck with sending my
> film off for processing, which kinda sucks.
>
> A tip of the hat to Steve's great book and to Jack
> Dykinga's book and my good friend Carl for getting
> me this far.
>
>
> rafe b.
> http://www.terrapinphoto.com

[MikeWhy]

"Leonard Evens" > wrote in message
...
> > http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchen2.jpg
>
> Great picture for a first attempt in relatively difficult lighting.
>
> You might experiment with taking the same picture but with verticals
> kept parallel, to familiarize yourself with movements.

I thought briefly earlier to comment on this also, but in the opposite
direction. I especially liked it that it wasn't so static, so tensely
vertical and formally posed. I also wondered if it wasn't intentional, and
if kitchen1.jpg was the one that was tipped vertical. :-)

[Leonard Evens]

MikeWhy wrote:
> "Leonard Evens" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>>http://www.terrapinphoto.com/kitchen2.jpg
>>
>>Great picture for a first attempt in relatively difficult lighting.
>>
>>You might experiment with taking the same picture but with verticals
>>kept parallel, to familiarize yourself with movements.
>
>
> I thought briefly earlier to comment on this also, but in the opposite
> direction. I especially liked it that it wasn't so static, so tensely
> vertical and formally posed. I also wondered if it wasn't intentional, and
> if kitchen1.jpg was the one that was tipped vertical. :-)

I didn't mean to suggest that this particular subject would have looked
better with parallel verticals, just that it would be worth trying it
for the experience. It might be something of a challenge, considering
the nature of the scene.

>

[geo]

"Gregory W Blank" > wrote in message
...

> For me it was rattlesnakes, almost stepped onto one
> just outside of Albequerque while scambling over rocks
> for some pics. Ouch and watch out for those crotch high
> catuses,...I got a leg full of very painfull 1.5" needles running back to
> the range rover for my meter.
> --

I got a butt-full crouching down to get a shot near Sedona, AZ years ago. I
assure you it's not nearly as funny as the cartoons would have you believe
although the people I was staying with got a good laugh pulling out the
spines for me. I'm so happy my suffering could provide them with a source of
amusement.

[Raphael Bustin]

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:54:00 GMT, "geo" > wrote:

>"Gregory W Blank" > wrote in message
...
>
>> For me it was rattlesnakes, almost stepped onto one
>> just outside of Albequerque while scambling over rocks
>> for some pics. Ouch and watch out for those crotch high
>> catuses,...I got a leg full of very painfull 1.5" needles running back to
>> the range rover for my meter.
>> --
>
>I got a butt-full crouching down to get a shot near Sedona, AZ years ago. I
>assure you it's not nearly as funny as the cartoons would have you believe
>although the people I was staying with got a good laugh pulling out the
>spines for me. I'm so happy my suffering could provide them with a source of
>amusement.


Suddenly I don't long for shooting pix in the
desert all that much. Maybe something to be
said for Appalachian forests and wetlands.

Worst annoyance round here are the
skeeters and black flies, though the deer
ticks can mess you up big time.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com